Living without religions

Man existed before religions existed. There were no ideas of Gods. Scriptures came after man. There was no Bible or the idea of the Bible before man.

There are stories built around the creation of the universe. But there must have been a man who wove the story of creation.

Man precedes everything, God, religions, scriptures.

If God created man, but the idea about God was created by man.

It is man who gave God that title.

Can you think about a master without a servant? It is the servant's existence that asserted or that averred the existence of the manster.

Religions in point of fact are creating voids, gulfs and fences. Imagine there is no religion, but there are values, respects and mutuality among us. Imagine man loves man instead of God.

In fact loving something abstract you have not seen and hating something vital or animate is not the morale of life.

Religions stands as a wall between two peoples.

Let us read the best of Krishna, the Buddha, Christ and forget the religions built around these greats.

But isnt believing a God between Krishna Buddha Christ or any other dedicating yourself to become religious? If you start believing and taking faith in a God, then it is inevitable you become active in a religion. This is because when you start having faith in a God, you start to worship, and follow their ways and words. How can you be individually religious? You automatically become classified into a religious group, therefore religion is inevitable.

If there was to be no religion and we do not live by it, we all become atheists, where we may or may not believe in the existance of a God but not taking faith in one. But how is it possible when there is certainty that at least one person in the world will dedicate themselves to a higher power? Religion therefore has to exist.

Yes, but if we break from organized religion we can live a personal spiritual existence, with individual values - though that is, I think, impossible, being that people like to band together. A sense of community is central to many religions, especially Judaism, where the relationship between people is far more important than the relationship between man and God. In truth, a personal religion, in a sense, exists within a frame, such as Buddhism, but I think cannot exist when you have Popes saying one moment this, and then the next moment that, or whatever. If religion is to exist in the modern world, it should break itself down, and allow itself to be less organized, less structured, and more personal.

In a sense, Native American traditions had it closer when they established the tradition of the spirituality between things, and people. Each thing is a spirit, and connects with other spirits, but doesn't submit himself to other spirits. A religious structure like that is far more beneficial than a radical cross-continent jihad.

But then again, perhaps something like that cannot survive. The west-coast native Canadians, for instance, once they established a sustainable way of life that was far more advanced than their plains neighbors, went right ahead and established hierarchies within society. Perhaps hierarchies are a product of civilization, and human kind, when not trying to band together for survival will automatically submit to an authority, and a caste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

Yes, but if we break from organized religion we can live a personal spiritual existence, with individual values - though that is, I think, impossible, being that people like to band together. A sense of community is central to many religions, especially Judaism, where the relationship between people is far more important than the relationship between man and God. In truth, a personal religion, in a sense, exists within a frame, such as Buddhism, but I think cannot exist when you have Popes saying one moment this, and then the next moment that, or whatever. If religion is to exist in the modern world, it should break itself down, and allow itself to be less organized, less structured, and more personal.

In a sense, Native American traditions had it closer when they established the tradition of the spirituality between things, and people. Each thing is a spirit, and connects with other spirits, but doesn't submit himself to other spirits. A religious structure like that is far more beneficial than a radical cross-continent jihad.

But then again, perhaps something like that cannot survive. The west-coast native Canadians, for instance, once they established a sustainable way of life that was far more advanced than their plains neighbors, went right ahead and established hierarchies within society. Perhaps hierarchies are a product of civilization, and human kind, when not trying to band together for survival will automatically submit to an authority, and a caste.

---

Thanks for sharing your views, and some information I have not been across such as Judaism and their values.
Your point about personal religion is exactly my point. Religion doesnt have to be in a group or society, all it requires is a system. A system dedicated to god(s) or inner belief. Personal religion is religion afterall. Personal or not, it is still religion. Therefore even if an individual worships God, they are religious and it takes one person to form a religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Thanks for sharing your views, and some information I have not been across such as Judaism and their values.
Your point about personal religion is exactly my point. Religion doesnt have to be in a group or society, all it requires is a system. A system dedicated to god(s) or inner belief. Personal religion is religion afterall. Personal or not, it is still religion. Therefore even if an individual worships God, they are religious and it takes one person to form a religion.

---

Hi, but Buddhism is not necessarily a religion, I would describe it more as a personal philosophy. There is no god in Buddhism, Buddha was simply a man the 'enlightened one' and there have been many Buddhas. It is also possible to attach some of the ideas of Jesus in a non-religious context too, towards a personal philosophy of life, something that is entirely personal and completely non-religious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neely

Hi, but Buddhism is not necessarily a religion, I would describe it more as a personal philosophy. There is no god in Buddhism, Buddha was simply a man the 'enlightened one' and there have been many Buddhas. It is also possible to attach some of the ideas of Jesus in a non-religious context too, towards a personal philosophy of life, something that is entirely personal and completely non-religious.

---

I was actually tentative to whether include Buddhism to my post but with limited understanding, I decided not to include it. Buddhism is a hard subject whether to swing it towards philosophy or into religion. But in my country, we regard it as a religion. May I ask you (if you do know) why people bow down in front of a Buddha statue? I do not understand the meaning, is it a sign of respect, worship or self spiritual perfomance?

It is true that a person can account Buddha and Jesus into being a part of their personal philosophy of life however when one starts to worshipping and accepting them to their lives, they become religious. I think thoes two things are very contrasting, and it makes one become an atheist and the other non atheist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

I was actually tentative to whether include Buddhism to my post but with limited understanding, I decided not to include it. Buddhism is a hard subject whether to swing it towards philosophy or into religion. But in my country, we regard it as a religion. May I ask you (if you do know) why people bow down in front of a Buddha statue? I do not understand the meaning, is it a sign of respect, worship or self spiritual perfomance?

---

Yes Buddhism sometimes sits in-between philosophy and religion, it is hard to classify, in the UK they class Buddhism as a religion too, but this 'whole scale' classification does not fit, it is simply down to individual interpretation.

I strongly suspect that the reasons some Buddhists use statues is in order to maintain focus during mediation and/or general daily pursuits. It is not that they are particularly worshiping Buddha, it is perhaps more accurate to say that they are using the image as a symbol towards their personal development.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

It is true that a person can account Buddha and Jesus into being a part of their personal philosophy of life however when one starts to worshipping and accepting them to their lives, they become religious. I think thoes two things are very contrasting, and it makes one become an atheist and the other non atheist.

---

It depends on how someone interprets the words of Jesus, it one sees Jesus as a philosopher and teacher only, as I do, and not as the son of God, then there is no reason that such a person is going to 'become religious' any more than if they use the ideas of other philosophers. One doesn't become religious just because one reads Freud or Plato.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neely

Yes Buddhism sometimes sits in-between philosophy and religion, it is hard to classify, in the UK they class Buddhism as a religion too, but this 'whole scale' classification does not fit, it is simply down to individual interpretation.

I strongly suspect that the reasons some Buddhists use statues is in order to maintain focus during mediation and/or general daily pursuits. It is not that they are particularly worshiping Buddha, it is perhaps more accurate to say that they are using the image as a symbol towards their personal development.

It depends on how someone interprets the words of Jesus, it one sees Jesus as a philosopher and teacher only, as I do, and not as the son of God, then there is no reason that such a person is going to 'become religious' any more than if they use the ideas of other philosophers. One doesn't become religious just because one reads Freud or Plato.

---

Ah insightful. Thank you for your explanations.
Also, when someone bows down 180times or more, what kind of personal development are they intending to achieve? I seen somewhere if one bow for a thousand time, a wish of theirs come true. Are there rules of bowing that corresponds to personal development/need?

Yes, that is my point. If some one that only takes in the words of Jesus as a spiritual leader and philosopher without taking in as a God or Saviour, then that person is non religious, or atheist. If some one that takes in the Words of Jesus and believe that He is their God and Saviour, one becomes a Christian, therefore religious.

Oh yes, I have another question, what are the Buddism views of an afterlife?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Ah insightful. Thank you for your explanations.
Also, when someone bows down 180times or more, what kind of personal development are they intending to achieve? I seen somewhere if one bow for a thousand time, a wish of theirs come true. Are there rules of bowing that corresponds to personal development/need?

Yes, that is my point. If some one that only takes in the words of Jesus as a spiritual leader and philosopher without taking in as a God or Saviour, then that person is non religious, or atheist. If some one that takes in the Words of Jesus and believe that He is their God and Saviour, one becomes a Christian, therefore religious.

Oh yes, I have another question, what are the Buddism views of an afterlife?

---

Oh no problem glad to help.

There is a difference between being a lay Buddhist and a Buddhist monk. Buddhist monks take things A LOT further than the standard lay Buddhist or Buddhist follower. A monk dedicates themselves to a particular order of which there are many. Off the top of my head there are at least 7/8 main branches of Buddhism, though inevitably there are sub-divisions. A Buddhist monk may have to follow 240+ rules depending upon a particular division.

It sounds like what you mention is a reading of a Buddhist text, over and over, sometimes used as part of a meditation in some orders. What they are NOT doing is praying, they are devoted to personal development and are using such words as they would the image of Buddha. Here is something from the Dhammapada which they may use:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit...p.01.than.html

I have no idea about the wish thing, sounds like rubbish to me and not part of any aspect of Buddhism that I know about, but who knows there are many individual orders so who knows?

There are also the lay Buddhists, the ordinary person who follows the Buddhist philosophy, like me in some ways. For lay Buddhists there are some fundamental common sense 'guides' like the four noble truths and the eightfold path, but no 'rules' at all as such - it is quite simply a form of personal philosophy. Of course the Buddhist monks follow these too on top of their extra devotions.

Four noble truths: http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/fourtruths.html

Eightfold Path: http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/eightfoldpath.html

As for re-birth, again there is no rule about this, it is up to the individual. but based on a few Buddhist forums that I am on I would say the majority of Buddhists believe in re-birth, say 75%? I certainly don't. I think this is where the common sense philosophy (or as what I see as such) and faith meet. Maybe such a division should/could determine the difference between philosophy and religion? Though in the end it doesn't really matter.

If you have any other questions I will be glad to help if I can, thanks John.

Skasian, buddhist views of the afterlife is the belief in reincarnation depending on our karma in our previous life, and the reach of enlightenment like buddha obtained. It's very complex, too complex to explain here, i suggest if you're interested, that you read up on it. We are not under the "creation" of one god, there is no "god", we can all reach a state of god like divinity through enlightenment

I stayed for a weekend at a Buddhist Abbey and learned a lot. I was able to speak with Geche Dorje, who was visiting, and talking with someone who is very advanced can help you make a lot of progress. For instance he explained the four sacred truths, and it was different hearing them than reading about them.

There is more to Buddhism than common sense. It is a religion although Buddhists are not pushy about that term. I would call it a religion because it is structured like one. There are monks who are authorities of sorts. My own religion - sanatana-dharma, the way of the soul - is very similar to Buddhism. Eating meat is prohibited as well as intoxication. Even food such as garlic is not taken. These are again more strictly observed by monks, or in my religion, brahmanas. I think in Buddhism there are 5 precepts all lay are supposed to follow, and there are more, like 9, for monks.

There are three jewels in Buddhism, as they are called. (I believe.) The Dharma, The Buddha, and the Sangha, and a lot of Buddhist prayer has to do with taking refuge of these. The Buddha is obviously the Buddha, the Dharma is the teachings of the Buddha, and the Sangha is the community of lay and monks.

This is just my own view and I certainly don't speak for any Buddhist organization, but I would say Buddhism is about searching for enlightenment also. It is a tenant of most if not all Buddhist schools of thought that our nature is buddha-nature. This means that our natural state is enlightenment, embodiment of bliss and wisdom. After death there are different states of being, in one of the earlier of which one may see a "Clear White Light," and this light is said to be the illumination of the enlightened ones.

Buddhists believe in anatta, the non-existence of the soul, while my religion believes that we are the soul. Both of them however believe bodily ego and desire to be illusion. Buddhism is about searching out reality. And when one inquries and searches, one realizes that we are part of reality, and only the illusion of separateness exists. I speak about myself as if I am separate. "I am searching for reality." But actually I have an inherent connection, as deep in my being as my being itself, rooted in reality. Searching for enlightenment is like searching for wetness while splashing about in the water. All forms of enlightenment are within us, they only require certain methods of bringing them to the fore.

But what does it mean to say that our nature is buddha-nature? What does it mean to say, as it does, in the Great Flower Ornament Sutra, that in every atom of the universe, there are oceans of world systems? Because of these, and because also of passages such as "The Buddha is equal to the realm of reality" and "the Buddha is equal to the cosmos," I got pointed in a certain direction...

After several experiences I had one where I ... "experienced" buddha-nature. It's difficult to describe. All I can say is that the rest of this is illusion. Buddhism teaches this, that our pure being, our pure essence, is obscured from us and we don't see it when we only use object-perception. I've found that at our core is Buddha and infinite Buddha-lands. Everything in life is some part of the divine - even the inconscient part is also some part of it. But we are somewhere on the spectrum experiencing. We are subject to illusion and so we don't see things as they are. There are so many illusions which we are always perpetuating to feed our desires - Ego, body, mind, attachment, time. We are inside a little box of sense-perception where our senses give us information which is filtered, and we don't get it purely or unfiltered. As William Blake said, "When the doors of perception are cleansed, then all will appear to man as it is, infinite."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neely

Oh no problem glad to help.

There is a difference between being a lay Buddhist and a Buddhist monk. Buddhist monks take things A LOT further than the standard lay Buddhist or Buddhist follower. A monk dedicates themselves to a particular order of which there are many. Off the top of my head there are at least 7/8 main branches of Buddhism, though inevitably there are sub-divisions. A Buddhist monk may have to follow 240+ rules depending upon a particular division.

It sounds like what you mention is a reading of a Buddhist text, over and over, sometimes used as part of a meditation in some orders. What they are NOT doing is praying, they are devoted to personal development and are using such words as they would the image of Buddha. Here is something from the Dhammapada which they may use:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit...p.01.than.html

I have no idea about the wish thing, sounds like rubbish to me and not part of any aspect of Buddhism that I know about, but who knows there are many individual orders so who knows?

There are also the lay Buddhists, the ordinary person who follows the Buddhist philosophy, like me in some ways. For lay Buddhists there are some fundamental common sense 'guides' like the four noble truths and the eightfold path, but no 'rules' at all as such - it is quite simply a form of personal philosophy. Of course the Buddhist monks follow these too on top of their extra devotions.

Four noble truths: http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/fourtruths.html

Eightfold Path: http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/eightfoldpath.html

As for re-birth, again there is no rule about this, it is up to the individual. but based on a few Buddhist forums that I am on I would say the majority of Buddhists believe in re-birth, say 75%? I certainly don't. I think this is where the common sense philosophy (or as what I see as such) and faith meet. Maybe such a division should/could determine the difference between philosophy and religion? Though in the end it doesn't really matter.

If you have any other questions I will be glad to help if I can, thanks John.

---

Thank you John for sharing your knowledge in Buddhism. Even though I have many friends that are Buddhist none of them could relieve my curiosity about Buddhism.
I apologise about the wish thing, I saw in a Korean drama about this buddist monk girl becoming a geisha type King's dancer. Thanks for the links, they were interesting.

I have another question if this is ok. I have been thinking about morality in all religions, and what rule/aspect does Buddism have about morality? Are there a specific aspect that tells people to avoid evil and act good as much as possible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by limajean

Skasian, buddhist views of the afterlife is the belief in reincarnation depending on our karma in our previous life, and the reach of enlightenment like buddha obtained. It's very complex, too complex to explain here, i suggest if you're interested, that you read up on it. We are not under the "creation" of one god, there is no "god", we can all reach a state of god like divinity through enlightenment

---

That is similar to what Nikolai described, and I think he is not Buddhist (Correct me if Im wrong Nik) anyway I have a question about the creation, what does Buddishts believe about creation or the start of the universe? Or is this like rebirth, how 75% believes in it while the others doesnt?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

I have another question if this is ok. I have been thinking about morality in all religions, and what rule/aspect does Buddism have about morality? Are there a specific aspect that tells people to avoid evil and act good as much as possible?

---

Absolutely, morality is at the very heart of Buddhism doing good for others is one of the absolute core objectives of it found in the eightfold path. The idea of personal development, is not personal as such, it is effective only in relation to others. A Buddhist aims to live by peace for all, even those aggressive towards them. I'll post you an interesting link about this later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

That is similar to what Nikolai described, and I think he is not Buddhist (Correct me if Im wrong Nik) anyway I have a question about the creation, what does Buddishts believe about creation or the start of the universe? Or is this like rebirth, how 75% believes in it while the others doesnt?

---

I know that this is not aimed at me as such but remember that the 75% mark is only my best guess based on nothing much. My answer would be that I distrust all "Buddhism is ..." statements, Buddhism is highly individual and it is NOT necessary to believe in re-birth in order to follow its philosophy. I don't really know about the creation, but as Buddhists do not believe in God, I suppose they would turn to science in order to answer the question.

Originally Posted by skasian
I have another question if this is ok. I have been thinking about morality in all religions, and what rule/aspect does Buddism have about morality? Are there a specific aspect that tells people to avoid evil and act good as much as possible?

Absolutely, morality is at the very heart of Buddhism doing good for others is one of the absolute core objectives of it found in the eightfold path. The idea of personal development, is not personal as such, it is effective only in relation to others. A Buddhist aims to live by peace for all, even those aggressive towards them. I'll post you an interesting link about this later.

Here it is, "The Parable of the Saw" it is right at the bottom of the page:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit...021x.budd.html